Forum: Classic Threads From The Past - Visit here for a great "blast from the past" and view some terrific, informative and interesting "Classic Threads" posted by thousands of savvy sportsbettors over the years here at The Rx.com.....

If you have decided to join TheRx.com you have to register before you can become a member: Click the red colored register link to proceed. Follow the simple instructions. Registration applications can take from 1 to 24 hours to be completed by our software.

JJ it is when one becomes a gambling addict and needs the action when one goes broke. Key word addict. Live and learn and if one does not learn from their mistakes they will never learn. No one becomes a sharp overnight. Why not pass there is always tomorrow.

That's the formula for the average bettor. If you factor in larger takes for better informed bettors you have to subtract percentages from the books winnings.

If a book thinks that the total for a game will be 73 but 60% of the public will bet 78 they will put the line higher than 73 and will make a hell of a lot more than their 52.3%.

QL : I disagree, a little. First the figure is 52.38 %, so 52.4 % is better rounding, but that's minor. The sharps bet more than squares, so the line will reach equillibreum ( sp ? ) in theory.

I don't think it's winning % that does most gamblers in, it's money management, overbetting, and chasing, same with Blackjack.

There are guys that can pick 56% and lose via money management.

Say start with $1,000 BR, bet 10 % ( way high ). He gets lucky runs it up to $5,500 quick. Bets $500 a game on 10 games over a weekend, goes 2-8, it happens, so he's got $2100 left, split it over 2 games, goes 0-2, DUDE IS BROKE NOW ! He quintupled the original stake, but overbet !, and lost.

That is how I think the books win ! They prey upon the human emotion of greed. 56% ground out over time is awesome potential.

If this 56% capper with $1,000 flat bet 2% of his bankroll on each bet ( a problem exists with bets going off at same time), say he got 3 bets a day and each was decided before next was made. He starts with a $20 bet. He has 1,095 bets a year. He will be very, very rich before too long. Incredibly rich in 5 years.

This is inspired by Fezzik, the priciples are his, so as I give proper credit.Fezzik wrote about hitting 60%, 56 % is high enough for this to work with a dime start.

Maybe Fezz or somebody will do the math for me, it's over my capabilities to calculate it, but I know it's true.

Math is good, but we are all not actuaries. Psychology of the game can be nearly as important, maybe more so in the right circumstances. Other factors also.

Networking helps, Get the Math Guy with the Headshrinker, and some others, blend it together, you may bet 57% out of it. Share it with too many, lines move. Many of the best don't post there stuff for free. Apply it to props, you can't even think about giving it out.

Anybody think Ace-Ace bets things he doesn't post on the RX ? Gee maybe he finds a prop on something, but can't give it to 1,000 people.

I had a small point with Ace, he advised flat-betting, but didn't really do it, then came out with $12,000 bet. I love this guy, but you can't bet from $200 to $12,000, and advocate flat Bets.

To: ACE-ACE: I LOVE YOU MAN, YOU USUALLY BET ABOUT 3-4 THOUSANDS ON YOUR BETS, YOU SAY BET SAMES, YOU'SE BET DIFFERENTS YOUSELF, WHY DAT ? IT START WITH $2500 ON THIS, BUT THEN $800 ON DAT, FOR FUN !

11 to 10 is difficult for sure, key is being patient and look for errors. Ken White is making tough numbers in college hoops, still beatable but little tougher than last year.

Early bird gets the worm in this computer age. I have been enjoy betting bowl quarters on the fly, Canes won all 4 of them last night. I wish Little Leauge was year round, am looking forward to West Coast Golf swing.

Anybody think Ace-Ace bets things he doesn't post on the RX ? Gee maybe he finds a prop on something, but can't give it to 1,000 people.

I had a small point with Ace, he advised flat-betting, but didn't really do it, then came out with $12,000 bet. I love this guy, but you can't bet from $200 to $12,000, and advocate flat Bets.

To: ACE-ACE: I LOVE YOU MAN, YOU USUALLY BET ABOUT 3-4 THOUSANDS ON YOUR BETS, YOU SAY BET SAMES, YOU'SE BET DIFFERENTS YOUSELF, WHY DAT ? IT START WITH $2500 ON THIS, BUT THEN $800 ON DAT, FOR FUN !

NOW YOU GO WILD ON ME ! YOU AIN'T NO FLAT-BETTAH !

WHAT I BET I POST.....I DO NOT BET ANYTHING ELES.....THE ONLY GAME I BET A LOT MORE MONEY ON WAS UCONN.....(MORE THAN I POSTED)....THAT BETWEEN ME AND MY WALLET.....

I BET TWO WAYS .....I HAVE ALWAY BET TWO WAYS...
1. BETS UNDER $1300....FOR FUN...OR ACTION
2. BETS OVER $2000.....FOR INVESTMENTS
I HAVE NOT TOLD A SOUL TO BET THE SAME ON ALL GAME....THAT DUMB!!

THE $12,000 PLUS BET WAS A ONCE IN A LIFE TIME BET FOR ME....AND YES I COULD NOT LOSE(95%)...(5%ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN).....I COULD NOT TELL WHAT IT WAS,,,,IT COULD HURT SOMEONE.....BUT 5-6 PLAYERS HERE WERE E-MAIL SOME NEWS ON IT.....

IF YOU HAVE FOLLOW ME....I HAVE BET ALL FLAT BETS UP TO WEEK 8 OR 9...
THAN THE LINE GET TIGHTER....THAN I LOOK FOR VALUE.....YES TEASER HAVE VALUE AT TIMES.....

Say start with $1,000 BR, bet 10 % ( way high ). He gets lucky runs it up to $5,500 quick. Bets $500 a game on 10 games over a weekend, goes 2-8, it happens, so he's got $2100 left, split it over 2 games, goes 0-2, DUDE IS BROKE NOW ! He quintupled the original stake, but overbet !, and lost.

That is how I think the books win ! They prey upon the human emotion of greed. 56% ground out over time is awesome potential.

If this 56% capper with $1,000 flat bet 2% of his bankroll on each bet ( a problem exists with bets going off at same time), say he got 3 bets a day and each was decided before next was made. He starts with a $20 bet. He has 1,095 bets a year. He will be very, very rich before too long. Incredibly rich in 5 years.

This is inspired by Fezzik, the priciples are his, so as I give proper credit.Fezzik wrote about hitting 60%, 56 % is high enough for this to work with a dime start.

Maybe Fezz or somebody will do the math for me, it's over my capabilities to calculate it, but I know it's true.

I did the math, using your initial conditions:
- Start with $1000
- 3 bets @ 2% of the day's starting balance per day
- 10% vig
(e.g. on first day place three bets, each one lay $22 to win $20)

The results after 5 years (1825 days, 5475 bets) are:
The average balance will be $1,000 with 53.381% win rate.
The average balance will be $100,000 with 54.39% win rate.
The average balance will be $1,000,000 with 55.40% win rate.
The average balance will be $1,000,000,000 with 58.42% win rate.

If anyone is interested in seeing the math let me know.:digit:

Dom

P.S.
A 50% win rate will leave you with less than $250, effectivly "broke" (unable to bet 2% of your money and make a minimum $5 bet) after 462 days.

Paisan: Good math, looks correct to me, except for typo. This proves a few things. You can beat -110 handily picking 55% with good money management, and a small starting stake. 55-56 % is hard to do long term. Any claims by touts of over 60% are ridiculous. 60% turns $1,000 into a billion + with 2,000 bets at 2% of BR. Of couse it's impossible to bet 20 million on a game, but you're filthy rich before you get that far.

Anybody have a link to Fezzik's article about 60%. The theory is his. It's more than theory, it's fact. The good news is it's easier with reduced juice, bonuses, free halves, etc. The bad news is they don't much matter after awhile. A free half on $500 means little on a 100k bet, which you will be making by hitting these percentages.

The math looks great but as we all know one of the problems is streaks. Do the numbers come out as well if you lose the first say 5 days going 1-2 type of thing and then start to win or what happens after a good month or two one goes cold for a month and has the same type of streak as the beginning posted above 1-2 etc. Happy new year to all

This is another totally incorrect thread. If you watch the volatility of line movement you'll see that at some point most lines have to be profitable one side or the other, easily enough to overcome -110. Books don't set perfect lines and they may not necessarily want to. Lines are just estimated probabilities based on limited information and interpretation. Plenty of room for error. What this thread should have said is that you shouldn't be betting at -110 ;)